* Arsen Arsenović via Gcc: > Sam James via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> writes: > >> Florian Weimer via Gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org> writes: >> >>> My understanding of the consensus goes as follows: >>> >>> * We want to make some changes in this area for GCC 14. >>> * We should do the same thing that Clang does: default to the relevant >>> -Werror= options. >>> * Unlike regular warnings, these warnings-as-errors should also apply >>> to system headers. >>> * At least implict-int and implicit-function-declaration should be >>> upgraded to errors in this way. >>> * It's too early to make the () changes and bool-as-keyword from C2X >>> for GCC 14. >>> * We should fix the missing scope of the int-conversion warnings >>> (PR109827). Likweise for incompatible-pointer-types (PR109826). >>> >>> Is this summary accurate? >>> >> >> I wasn't there, but this reflects my understanding & what I would've >> said if I could've attended. >> >>> I think the open issues are: >>> >>> * Do we want to implement something else beside implicit-int and >>> implicit-function-declaration? (Candidates are int-conversion and >>> incompatible-pointer-types, and the void vs non-void part of >>> return-type, maybe others as previously discussed on the list.) >> >> Ideally, I'd like both int-conversion + incompatible-pointer-types in >> this cycle, but if we have to defer one, I'd say to keep int-conversion. > > +1, this seems reasonable. I'm not sure I can imagine any even > half-legitimate use for falling off the end of functions and similar, so > perhaps we should also take return-type? Is that part of C23?
Falling of the end of the function is legitimate if a no-return function is called and not annotated as such, among other things. I don't think we should warn or error for that by default. The issue I'm concerned about is about “return;” in a function not returning void, or “return expr;” in a function returning void. This looks like related to implict int return types for functions. It's not part of C99. There is no separate -W switch to control this warning. It is on by default (as required by C99), unlike other aspects of -Wreturn-type. Thanks, Florian
